Krauthammer on Obama’s foreign jaunt
Read Krauthammer on Obama’s trip, and the fruit it might bear.
All in all, Obama makes Carter look as though he was ahead of his times, and rather conservative as well. Who knew?
The New Neo
A blog about political change, among other things
Obama wanted more stimulus spending from Europe. He got nothing….
And so on.
My Irish friend who attends to European papers closely says — and he admits that he is reading between the lines — that European leaders have already taken Obama’s measure and found him a lightweight.
They are happy to have an American president whom they can take advantage of.
The Europeans know they’re dealing with a pop star, not a world leader. It might be fun to pose for pictures with the Wonderful O, but I see no sign that the G20 leadership hold Obama in any kind of esteem. How can you respect someone who spends all his time abroad in front of a teleprompter knocking his own country?
This is what America gets for electing someone with no executive background, no proper sense of history or decorum, and no sense of proportion. It’s no surprise the Europeans are uncooperative and largely unmoved by Obama’s glamour – what responsible world leader would make deals with someone who’s so little worthy or trust or confidence?
that’s “so little worthy of trust or confidence.”
If you haven’t already seen it, this link about Obama’s “response” to the pirates is
worth a look (http://tinyurl.com/cgvmcs).
Unfortunately for us Obama was never held accountable for the nasty politics he practiced. He was relentless in smashing his opponents during his run for the Illinois senate. And, during the presidential campaign, he disavowed and denigrated the likes of his grandmother and J Wright when it became politically expediently to do so. And not only was he not held responsible for those actions – he was ultimately rewarded for them.
So why should he think he will be held accountable for denigrating his country and its citizens and abandoning our allies in order to garner personal popularity?
Most of us learned at some point in our lives that those who always smile at us and slap our back are rarely our friends. More often they are using us. To me it is so telling of the incredible arrogance and hubris of the man that Obama discounts this lesson (especially since it is obvious he has done this self-same thing to others – using them -as I mentioned above). I think he truly believes he is such a compelling and charismatic person that others will never turn on him or use him.
Again unfortunate for us because we are along for the ride.
We have an unfortunate problem, that most can’t quite admit yet, because events are being orchestrated at a pace equivalent to a sucker punch, and those who aren’t simply in shock are still in denial. But it’s apparent to me now that America has elected a traitor to sit in the White House, and the Democrat Party from the top to the dedicated grass roots level are either enthusiastic supporters, or along for a smug ignorant ride. In any case, check out Caroline Glick’s latest astute analysis.
[from neo-neocon: I tried to fix the link. I assume this one’s the article you were referring to.]
Sorry for the type, try this: Caroline Glick’s latest astute analysis.
Sorry again for another typo, hope this link finally works: “Caroline Glick’s latest.”, if not you know where to find her…
Yes thanks Neo, and have a wonderful Easter everyone!
I count myself as one of those in shock, even though I believed all along that an Obama election would be most unfortunate. A “sucker punch” indeed! I feel as if I want to smack people on the face and scream “Snap out of it!” (Of course, I won’t. Maybe some others might take the suggestion…?)
This truly is, and will continue to be an abject lesson in how the great accomplishments of little more than two centuries of spirit and will and plain old gumption can be reversed so quickly. But then, this is not the first time a clever politician backed by an ambitious team manipulated the people of a nation to achieve changes not in those people’s best interest.
It’s just that few of us ever imagined this could REALLY happen here.
The question I have is, even when enough people have a clear grasp of President Obama’s intentions of “CHANGE,” will the hubris of many of his acolytes allow them to admit to having made a mistake of enormous proportions?
As for me, I have tried hard to maintain optimism and avoid ODS (Obama Derangement Syndrome) as neo suggested many times, but this most recent trip of the President’s, during which he took every opportunity to denigrate Americans and our history, avoid any mention of our generosity and the good we have done in this world and pander to so many who wish us harm, did push me over that edge. And not even 3 months in……….
It is even worse than we thought. Germany’s foreign minister, Steinmeier, is now joining the smaller parties in using the disarmament speech to push for getting US nukes out of Germany. Of course, that would be a Mogadishu moment for the Russians spin machine, but who cares? It is just great to see our foreign policy being manipulated for the purpose of a German political campaign. Thanks, Barry.
I wrote about Americans not understanding numbers and, therefore, not begin able–or perhaps willing–to look at a few sets of numbers, or a chart, or graph and, thereby, gain a very clear understanding of just how bad things are going to be in the U.S. economically as a direct result of the unprecedented and extraordinarily foolhardy “drunken sailor” spending binge Obama and the Democrats have unleashed.
There is one major underlying problem–already in existence when Obama took office–whose effects are going to be hastened and magnified by Obama’s profligate spending, and are going to make the coming Obama economic train wreck even more severe than it was already going to be, and that is our already astronomical “entitlement spending”; major entitlements include Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Federal civilian and military retirement benefits, Veterans Benefits, Unemployment Insurance, Food Stamps, and Interest on the Public Debt.
While we have all probably heard mentions over the last several years of the crisis in “entitlement spending,” or in “Social Security” or in “Medicare,” it is rare to see detailed information explaining the exact nature of this problem, its dimensions and its probable effects in the general press. I believe one major reason for this is that this problem, created by Congress itself, is so horrific that our Congress–which, although aware of this growing problem for decades and through several presidential administrations, has not done anything of any consequence to solve this problem–does not want us to know just how badly they have failed us; they do not want to create a “panic,” or an “overreaction” caused by giving citizens detailed, concrete, meaningful information describing just when and how bad the onrushing day of reckoning is going to be, information which would provoke intense anger at them, and massive and, indeed, “panicky” and rightly so, calls for some sort of a solution; Obama’s “drunken sailor” spending advances that day of reckoning and it’s severity.
An “entitlement” is a right to a benefit prescribed by law; if you meet the requirements for an entitlement, you get it. Thus, when they turn 65, most people are “entitled” to Social Security, if your family income is under the “poverty line,” you are “entitled” to certain benefits. Congress does not have to analyze and justify such benefits each year, vote to set the threshold requirements and amounts of such entitlements, or even vote to appropriate funds each year, because they have set these ever expanding entitlement programs up to work automatically, independent of them, and not requiring any further inconvenient or controversial analyses, debates, justifications or votes on their part; they have created and let loose Frankenstein’s monster, a budget devouring “Golem.”
Two things need to be understood about entitlement to these benefits.
First, that the dollar amount of the “poverty line” is indexed for inflation, i.e. it moves higher each year, and thus inevitably includes under it’s umbrella of coverage more and more people who are “entitled” to benefits each year, and Social Security is similarly “indexed,” so that SS benefits also increase each year; thus, both the number of those receiving entitlements and the amount of their entitlements automatically increases each year.
The second thing that needs to be understood about spending for entitlements is how the amount of government money to be paid out each year for such entitlements is categorized within the federal budget. Government spending can be looked at as being of two kinds, “mandatory”–things you absolutely have to pay for, and “discretionary”–extra things you can pay for with the money left over after you have paid for mandatory items. Government payments for entitlements are “sequestered,” are “mandatory” and cannot be used for any other purpose. Over the last decades mandatory entitlement spending has risen to consume over 50% of the entire budget, constantly reducing the amount available for discretionary spending, leaving less and less discretionary money to pay for every thing else and, thus, less maneuvering room for the President and Congress.
A salient estimate from the last Bush budget:
“Human Resources” i.e. estimated expenditures for entitlements in the FY08 Bush budget, were an estimated 64% of all federal outlays (see Historical Tables, Table 3.1, Outlays By Superfunction and Function 1940-2013, and look at the section for “outlays by percentage” at http://tinyurl.com/5ya5wj). So far, I have not been able to find corresponding Historical Tables for the Obama budget. I am sure it is just a little oversight.
P.S. Sorry for the long, off topic comment above, but I just felt I had to make this point.
My final point.
All of these various government entitlement programs are tied together, and affect, “potentiate,” each other.
Thus, if Obama’s reckless spending and the resultant drastic increase in the money supply causes inflation, Social Security and other entitlement benefits, indexed for inflation, will go up and, as job losses mount, more and more people will qualify for various entitlements, because they will be unemployed, under employed, or have family incomes below a poverty line that will also be higher because it too is indexed for inflation, so that even more of the federal budget will have to be devoted to paying for mandatory entitlements.
Now, now, Wolla, you shouldn’t use such a derisive, divisive term such as “pirates” anymore. If you expect dialogue and understanding to advance, they should be referred to as “undocumented maritime entreprenuers” from now on.
Lee-it is very true that one of the first, essential things you need to do to subvert things, is to change terminology, so that you no longer speak the truth about anything, or give anything its correct name.
Thus we get “gay” rights–are a lot of the practices of homosexuals things that produce a culture/mood that it really characterized by true gaiety?
Or, we get Bill Clinton arguing over what “sexual intercourse” means, or the meaning of “is.”
Or aliens who have come into our country illegally by sneaking across our boarders are not called “illegal aliens,” but are called “undocumented immigrants.”
This is how you start subverting reality, and create a culture of lies, because people would not accept what you are doing or want to do, if it were called by its true and correct name.
P.S–
Footnotes:
See Obama, and his “hope,” “change” and “we are the people we have been waiting for.”